Former Governor Eliot Spitzer (D -NY) must have an awfully short memory. After being sued by the firearms industry almost 10 years ago for conspiring to cause economic harm by imposing arbitrary regulations on the design, manufacture, distribution and sale of firearms, Mr. Spitzer is now advocating an illegal boycott of companies that don't kowtow to his anti-gun agenda.
In March of 2000, New York Attorney General Spitzer and other government officials announced formation of a coalition to coerce firearms manufacturers to abide by an arbitrary and politically motivated list of firearms regulations entitled the "Code of Conduct" as a condition to supplying firearms to members of the coalition. Spitzer said, "We want every appropriate government entity to agree to purchase firearms only from companies that have signed a comprehensive code of conduct." Spitzer said the objective of the coalition was to "...boycott gun manufacturers who fail to adhere to a new safety code."
Now, flash forward to yesterday's column on Slate.com:
"The government that President Obama oversees is also a gigantic, well-funded procurement agent. And it can-and should-use that power to change American gun policies. Specifically, the government buys lots of guns, for sheriffs, patrol officers, and detectives; for FBI agents, DEA agents, IRS agents, Postal Inspectors, immigration agents, and park rangers; and for soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, and spies. The government buys guns by the crate."
Mr. Spitzer goes on to argue that government agencies (federal, state and local) should only purchase firearms from manufacturers who adhere to a "code of conduct." Spitzer specifically notes that the government should not purchase firearms from manufacturers who sell to retailers with multiple firearm traces (despite the fact that ATF has repeatedly stated that a trace is in no way an indicator of criminal wrongdoing by either the retailer or first purchaser of the firearm) or to manufacturers who sell certain types of firearms to citizens.
It will be interesting to see how law enforcement officers and military personnel react to the suggestion that the firearms they carry (to protect themselves and others) be selected for political reasons rather than the best gun suited for their needs.